Perfluorooctane sulfonate toxicity, isomer-specific accumulation, and maternal transfer in zebrafish (<i>Danio rerio</i>) and rainbow trout (<i>Oncorhynchus mykiss</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS; C(8)F(17)SO(3) (-)) bioaccumulation and toxicity have been demonstrated in both aquatic and terrestrial organisms. The majority of investigations have examined total PFOS concentrations in wildlife and in toxicity testing, but isomer-specific monitoring studies are less common, and no laboratory-based study of PFOS isomer accumulation in fish has been reported. The present study examined accumulation and maternal transfer of PFOS isomers in zebrafish and tissue-specific accumulation of PFOS isomers in trout parr. A median lethal dose (LC50) of 22.2 and 2.5 mg/L was calculated for adult zebrafish and trout parr, respectively. A two-week PFOS exposure resulted in tissue-specific PFOS accumulation in trout, with maximum concentrations identified in the liver tissue (>50 microg/g). Prior exposure to PFOS as alevin did not affect the accumulation of PFOS in tissues later in life. In both species, accumulation of branched PFOS isomers generally occurred to a lesser extent than linear PFOS, which may explain the relative deficiency of branched PFOS isomers in some aquatic species in the field. Analysis of exposed trout tissues indicated that isomer discrimination may occur at the level of elimination or uptake and elimination processes in the kidney or gill, respectively. When zebrafish underwent a reproductive cycle in the presence of PFOS, approximately 10% (wt) of the adult PFOS body burden was transferred to the developing embryos, resulting in a higher total PFOS concentration in eggs (116 +/- 13.3 microg/g) than in the parent fish (72.1 +/- 7.6 microg/g). The isomer profile in eggs was not significantly different from that of adults, suggesting that the maternal transfer of branched and linear PFOS isomers in fish is largely nonisomer specific.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".